Current Red Bull Racing

Red Bull Racing

FIA Entry: Red Bull Racing Renault
Car 1: Sebastien Vettel
Car 2: Mark Webber
Engine: Renault V8
Team Owner: Dietrich Mateschitz
Team Principal: Christian Horner
Chief Technical: Office Adrian Newey
Chief Designer: Rob Marshall
Race Engineer Car 1: Guillaume “Rocky” Rocquelin
Race Engineer Car 2: Ciaron Pilbeam

Stats as of end 2010

First Entered 2005
Races Entered 107
Race Wins 15
Pole Positions 20
Fastest Laps 12
Driver World Championships 1
Constructor World Championships 1

Team History

Before Red Bull

In 1997 Paul Stewart, aided by his father Jackie and the Ford Motor Company, made the leap from F3000 to F1 as an entrant. Jonny Herbert won 1 race for the Stewart team before it was sold off to Ford who re-branded the cars as Jaguar.

Ford stuck with it through thick and thin (mainly thin) through to the end of 2004 before selling the team to Dietrich Mateschitz, who owns the Red Bull drinks brand, for $1 on the understanding he invested $400 million over 3 years

Red Bull Racing

With Christian Horner installed as team principal, McLaren refugee David Coulthard and Christian Klien as the drivers Red Bull went racing. Their first season was certainly more successful than Jaguar had managed, even with the same Cosworth power plant, with Coulthard managing a 4th place at the European Grand Prix and the team finishing 7th in the Constructors Championship.

Adrian Newey joined from McLaren as chief designer for 2006 and Red Bull swapped to Ferrari engines. Coulthard managed a podium at his "home" race in Monaco prompting Christian Horner to jump naked, other than wearing a red cape, into a swimming pool.

Christian Klien, who shared the car with Vitantonio Liuzzi in 2005 and Robert Doornbos in 2006, departed the team for 2007 and was replaced by Mark Webber. The RB3 was the first full "Newey" car and was coupled with a Renault motor. The car was very unreliable, suffering from a variety of different problems but Webber managed a podium at the European Grand Prix and the team finished 5th in the WCC.

Retaining the same engine and drivers for 2008 Red Bull slipped back to 7th in the WCC and again only managed a single podium, for Coulthard in Canada, but the reliability issues which plagued the car the previous season were mainly resolved.

2009 was Red Bull's break through year. With Coulthard having retired Webber was joined by Red Bull junior driver Sebastien Vettel. The new rules allowed Newey to design a car which challenged for both the Drivers and Constructors Championship. Webber won 2 races, Vettel 4 and the team climbed to 2nd in WCC taking 3 pole positions en-route.

In 2010 Red Bull justified Mateschitz's investment winning the Constructors title and Vettel the Drivers Championship. They won 9 races through the season, 5 for Vettel and 4 for Webber and took 10 poles. Webber led the title race for much of the season but it was the 23 year old Vettel who stole the title in the last race of the season and became the youngest Champion as a result.

2011 sees the team retain the same driver line up as 2010 and continue with Renault engine power in the new RB7 car.

 

[FB]

Yeah, 'cos no other team has ever appealed a decision before have they? What nonsense for Saward, if he really is an experienced F1 Journalist he should realise that all the teams would not only sell their Granny to win a race but dice, fillet and pan fry her if that is what is required. They all cheat, whether within the spirit or the letter of the rules. Should Mercedes be banned for having illegal nose cameras?

 

[RasputinLives]

Yes and for those blacked out helmets used for security reasons!



(By the way I quite like Joe Saward but wouldn't say I agree with everything he says)

I reckon would have got a race ban at least in the time of Max. Now though they'd be too worried about lost revenue.

 

[Mephistopheles]

I wish I had used the name Mate schitz for my FF1 team...

 

[Mephistopheles]

So let me try and get this correct, RedBull are hinting that if they are not allowed to do what they want, when they want regardless of the rules then they won't play anymore, nah nah, nah, nah nah..

Is that a correct summarization of what Mr Mateschitz is saying..?

 

[Westy]

DM: We aren't getting our way for once, better toss the toys out of the pram.

 

[Slyboogy]

As if grey areas have never been exploited before.

Not sure I get Saward's point of view, they all have pushed the boundaries at some point, while plenty have been unsporting.

 

[The Artist.....]

The irony is that mateschitz has said this

Mateschitz said Red Bull's future in F1 was more

"to do with sportsmanship and political influence" than finance.

SPORTSMANSHIP????????????

 

[FB]

How many times have Ferrari threatened to leave F1? The reason we have V6 engines is because Ferrari refused to build a straight 4 and if the FIA didn't change their minds on the regs they would clear off to sportscar racing. Give the baby his bottle, as soon as Red Bull get back to winning ways the whole thing will be forgotten, unless Red Bull lose the WCC by 18 points...

 

[The Artist.....]

The thing is this: F1 can survive without Red Bull.

As far as I can see, RB have been the most detrimental force in modern f1.

They ignored the resource restriction agreement.
They developed variable plasticity carbon fibre- to allow bendy wings
They introduced hot blowing of the diffuser ( and denied they were doing it)

Whilst some would argue that there's not a big difference between red bull in the 2010s and Ferrari in the 2000s, I suppose the big difference is that Ferrari have heritage... Red Bull is there to simply sell evil tasting fizzy drinks!

 

[Plutus]

Isn't it funny that a team that produces fizzy drinks and with no heritage in F1 was dominating automobile companies such as McLaren or Ferrari and seem to have more of a clue at what they are doing.

The points you make about Red Bull being detrimental to F1, actually point to the FIA. The FIA could ban flexing wings and blown diffusors by changing the TR. Why did they not do that?

Red Bull with Adrian Newey have been on the forefront of innovation for the last 4 years and been on the limit of the rulebook but never broke the rules with flexing wings (they didnot flex under the forces the FIA applied, therefore they cannot be flexible wings in terms of the regulations) or the blown diffusor.

And don't make out Red Bull as the only bad boys, Ferrari never had any intention of staying within the budget cap. No one in F1 is willing to give in, when they see a chance of winning, in this highly competitive sport.

But I agree that F1 can survive without Red Bull, the sport could also survive without Ferrari or McLaren. Red Bull can survive without F1 too.

 

[The Artist.....]

The FIA could ban flexing wings and blown diffusors by changing the TR. Why did they not do that?

Because in order to change a technical regulation without a safety reason would require 100% agreement of the teams according to the Concorde agreement. - and mid-season it's even harder!

 

[Plutus]

Because in order to change a technical regulation without a safety reason would require 100% agreement of the teams according to the Concorde agreement. - and mid-season it's even harder!

No.

Prior to 2013, any decision to change the sporting or technical regulations required the agreement of at least 70% (or nine votes) of the teams in order for those changes to be accepted. From 2013 onwards, those changes will only need a 51% majority (six teams) in order to be approved.

 

[teabagyokel]

Thankfully, it is an entirely empty threat. Would F1 be worse without them? I tend to think the F1 roadshow rolls on; it lost Lotus and Brabham, it can lose Red Bull.

 

[Titch]

I think that RBR are doing the equivalent of stamping their feet and throwing a tantrum. Having invested in the team, the drivers and the car, are they really going to throw all that money away?

 

[Greenlantern101]

Its proper toys out the pram stuff. Were not winning so we cheated and if we don't get to continue cheating were leaving.

I have been laughing so much it hurts.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula-one/26721387

 

[F1Yorkshire]

The only downside to Redbull leaving would be the gaping hole left in the grid. Two teams would have to be sold with many staff out of work including a lot of the original Minardi workforce. Without Redbull I'm sure a budget cap could be agreed upon though to enable new teams to come in.

The opportunity to score points would be there for the current slower teams so the benefits are starting to outweigh the bad.

As long as Redbull find suitable buyers for the equipment and employers for their workforce I wouldn't mind if they left tomorrow!

 

[KekeTheKing]

What nonsense for Saward

He's spot on that this was terrible timing for RBR to try this stunt. All the teams were more than willing to go along with the plan that allowed for a tolerance because they didn't need to call unnecessary attention to the fact that these fuel flow sensors are not perfect. Why they thought they had to pull this in the first GP is hard to fathom. All of this technology is in its infancy and instead of going along with the rest of the paddock they decided to steal a march on everyone with the only possible outcome that the FIA, the supplier, and themselves would end up looking bad.

 

[The Pits]

I have just read on Twitter, from Grand Prix Diary:

"Red Bull hearing set for 14th April. The team immediately protest, saying their calendar says it should be th 15th"

 

[Plutus]

As long as Redbull find suitable buyers for the equipment and employers for their workforce I wouldn't mind if they left tomorrow!

Selling would most likely result in nothing more than a name and ownership change with the management still in place which would change nothing, after all they have not proven to be incompetent, so why change?

 

[teabagyokel]

Plutus - Exactly, which makes Mateschitz' threat all the more pointless.